SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Completed Project Threads Archive (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=348)
-   -   NEW YORK | 111 W 57th St | 1,428 FT | 85 FLOORS (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198228)

supertallchaser Jan 3, 2014 12:08 AM

^twinning

tyleraf Jan 3, 2014 2:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMGarcia (Post 6391662)
The problem with public review processes is that it really isn't a "public" review but a "special interests" review, usually a facade for politicians for shaking down the developer. Developer donates to campaign fund: politician's operatives don't make much of a stink at a "public" review. I'm sure you can figure out the opposite of that. The second segment of the "public" that will bother to pay attention is those that will lose their view, be inconvenienced by the construction, or will be afraid of crowding in the area because of increased density.

The best that could be hoped for is an independent board or architects to review proposals. I'd bet though that even they would disappoint a lot of people.

You guys need a system like San Diego has downtown. In Sd each of our proposals has a design review by a community board where design suggestions are made and then it goes before the downtown development group board which then will either approve the project or tell the developer to make changes and reapply. It works out pretty well.

NYguy Jan 3, 2014 3:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Minimis NY (Post 6391490)
I am enraged that Extell can alter the skyline with the garbage they have planned at 255 W 57th while Torre Verre has been stunted from making the impact that it deserves. These kinds of missed opportunities make it hard for me not to sympathize with those that would like to see greater public control over the city's most prominent projects. People come from all over the world to see our skyline, it's one of the primary factors that make NY such a desirable place to live and visit. As such, the aesthetic appeal (or lack thereof) of these towers has a real economic impact on the city and thus the public at large.

The way to fix it is to create a commission that rewards quality design with a grant of additional air rights (similar to what is proposed for the re-zoning of midtown east, but applied throughout the city and on an ad hoc basis) and thus incentivize developers to create projects that benefit everyone. Under such a system, a developer would voluntarily choose to apply to an architecture board for the grant of air rights in lieu of (or in addition to) buying air rights from other sources.

The problem with all of that is you simply can't regulate "taste". People from around the world liked and came to see the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center. Would the design of those buildings have survived any architectural review board? Most likely not.

Skyscrapers aren't anything new in this city that has been building them for well over a century without any type of review board, and yet it's the most iconic skyline in the world. The skyline needs to evolve naturally, as it always has. There's no way to guarantee that we are going to like everything that gets built, whether there is any type of review board or not.



Quote:

Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas (Post 6391533)
I'm less bothered by supertalls around Central Park than I am seeing them surround and hide the Empire State and Chrysler Buildings.

It could be argued that the MAS has more of an argument there, though that argument too is one that has failed. That battle played out in the 15 Penn Plaza saga.



Quote:

Originally Posted by JMGarcia (Post 6391662)
The best that could be hoped for is an independent board or architects to review proposals. I'd bet though that even they would disappoint a lot of people.

They certainly would. Understand that architects themselves have opinions on what is good design, and what is not. And as you can see from a lot of the work being put out, more times than not, we are critical of what they see as "good" design. I put no more faith in architects than I do the average man on the street.

New York has enough regulations on what can be built. Just look at the hoops that a tower like the Tower Verre had to go through, only to be cut down. I don't know how many people here are really aware of it, but the special permit process for that tower relates more to the design than the actual height of the tower. They could always build a taller tower, but the special permits that allow them to build a tower outside design regulations wouldn't be issued. Those permits will only be issued at the 1,050 ft height. Now you have to ask yourself, would the Empire State itself have survived such a process? How about the Chrysler? We can't say for certain about back then, but I do know if such towers were proposed today as the tallest, there certainly would be pushback.



Quote:

Originally Posted by tyleraf (Post 6391779)
You guys need a system like San Diego has downtown. In Sd each of our proposals has a design review by a community board where design suggestions are made and then it goes before the downtown development group board which then will either approve the project or tell the developer to make changes and reapply. It works out pretty well.

See the reply above. But beyond that, such a proposal won't work for New York. There's too much going on for one thing.

NYguy Jan 7, 2014 7:25 PM

From the schedule A, it appears floors (17-33) will be single floor units(18 being mechanical), floors (34-35) mechanical, floors (36-54) will also be single floor units, floors (55-56) mechanical, floor (57) is amenity space, floors (58-59) are a duplex unit, floors (60-63) single floor units, floors (64-71) duplex units, and floors (72 -75) will be a 4-level penthouse. Floors (76-77) will be mechanical. Those are actual floor numbers, they will probably change to higher counts with marketing.


You can see the changes in the plan to demolish part of the Steinway building in the rear...


before

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/152531300/original.jpg


after

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154054066/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154054067/original.jpg

NYguy Jan 11, 2014 12:25 AM

New permit...


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=04


Quote:

INSTALL STRUCTURAL WORK AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS FILED HEREWITH.

supertallchaser Jan 11, 2014 1:01 AM

^great ,cannot wait for this to be done.

NYguy Jan 13, 2014 10:14 PM

More of the same...

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01


http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

NYguy Jan 16, 2014 9:44 PM

http://a810-bisweb.nyc.gov/bisweb/Jo...ssdocnumber=01

Quote:

INSTALL NEW STANDPIPE SYSTEM. INSTALL SPRINKLER HEADS AND RELATED PIPING AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS FILED HEREWITH.

NYguy Jan 20, 2014 5:23 PM

January 19, 2014


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154192922/original.jpg



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154192925/original.jpg

Hypothalamus Jan 24, 2014 7:12 PM

The quality is stupendous-- thanks Babybackribs! I won't post the whole thing, but everyone should take a few minutes to read @ YIMBY!

New York YIMBY:

Interview: Michael Stern of JDS Development
BY: NIKOLAI FEDAK ON JANUARY 24TH 2014 AT 1:00 PM

http://www.yimbynews.com/wp-content/...4/01/stern.jpg
Michael Stern -- image from JDS

Quote:

111 West 57th is your tallest project to date, and the initial design was by CetraRuddy. What’s the back-story on that project — getting into it, did you see it turning into something that would end up 1,350 feet tall?

Initially we only owned the vacant lot and some air rights from an adjacent building, so we designed a roughly 680-foot tower with CetraRuddy that was more slender than what’s going up. We are doing this project with a great partner — Kevin Maloney and Property Markets Group, who was also our partner on Walker Tower.

It was more slender?

It was, the original was only 43 feet wide. You know, it wasn’t a very efficient building; it worked and we were ready to break ground on it, but then we found out the Steinway Building was available, and we knew that incorporating Steinway would make the building much better, much more efficient; it would be wider, taller, and have more commanding views. We sort of stopped when we were ready to go, and rebooted with the Steinway Building. It’s a vastly better project — very happy we didn’t start with the original. It was a great tower, but the one we’re building now is better; it’s 60 feet wide, almost 80 feet deep, and almost 1,400 feet tall. It’s a spectacular tower, it really is. And the floor-plans it has produced are no-excuses terrific — it’s going to be exciting.
http://www.yimbynews.com/wp-content/...01/111w572.jpg
111 West 57th Street — image from SHoP

More details on 111 West 57th at New York YIMBY

Submariner Jan 24, 2014 7:51 PM

What a gem. I can't wait to see this one rise. Is there any word on when it will start to do so?

M. Incandenza Jan 24, 2014 8:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubeworm (Post 6421299)
The quality is stupendous-- thank's Babybackribs! I won't post the whole thing, but everyone should take a few minutes to read @ YIMBY!

Michael Stern is such a mensch.

babybackribs2314 Jan 24, 2014 9:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubeworm (Post 6421299)
The quality is stupendous-- thank's Babybackribs! I won't post the whole thing, but everyone should take a few minutes to read @ YIMBY!

Thank you! :cheers:

599GTO Jan 25, 2014 2:57 AM

Michael Stern comes across as a really great guy, and this building is one of the most beautiful skyscrapers I have ever seen.

We need more developers like him in New York City.

sbarn Jan 25, 2014 3:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubeworm (Post 6421299)
New York YIMBY:

Interview: Michael Stern of JDS Development
BY: NIKOLAI FEDAK ON JANUARY 24TH 2014 AT 1:00 PM

Any indication of financing? Construction timing?

Hypothalamus Jan 25, 2014 3:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbarn (Post 6421956)
Any indication of financing? Construction timing?

I don't have any additional information other than work should be starting this year. Possibly the author of NY YIMBY, aka babybackribs2314 on the forums, has some insider knowledge! Babyback?

Crawford Jan 25, 2014 3:35 AM

So the building will be "almost 1,400 ft. tall" according to the developer.

Could it be taller than 432 Park, and therefore the second tallest residential in the city, after 225 W.57?

ILNY Jan 25, 2014 3:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubeworm (Post 6421299)
New York YIMBY:

Interview: Michael Stern of JDS Development
BY: NIKOLAI FEDAK ON JANUARY 24TH 2014 AT 1:00 PM

Great interview Nikolai, Michael Stern seems like a nice guy.

Can you interview Gary Barnett now :) and tell him what Michael said (quoting YIMBY) "I think that developers have an enormous responsibility to respect the skyline, because you’re leaving an impact that’s going to last 100 years, or more ...You’re leaving an imprint that’s going to outlive you as a developer;...." Gary still has time to change his design.

Hypothalamus Jan 25, 2014 3:52 AM

^^^ Kind words-- but I'm merely the messenger! ;) Babybackribs (Nikolai) is the man behind YIMBY glory, but he reads these forums so he will get your message!

NYguy Jan 27, 2014 2:32 AM

Almost 1,400 ft tall is good news. I would like to see what further design changes have been made. It's shaping up to be another great year.



http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/154256326/original.jpg


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.